A Man With a 'Systemic' Science-Reform Plan

Luther S. Williams strides purposefully into the lobby of the
National Press Club here, pumping a reporter's hand with the air of a
man on the move.

After exchanging polite, though terse, greetings, Mr. Williams sets
the pace for the short walk down the hall. Setting the pace, his
admirers and critics agree, is something to which the 54-year-old
biochemist is quite accustomed.

As the assistant director of the National Science Foundation's
education and human-resources directorate, Mr. Williams has embarked on
a difficult task. He seeks to increase dramatically the opportunities
for precollegiate students, particularly poor and minority students, to
study "serious" science and mathematics.

With the support of Congress, his strategy for achieving that goal
has been to funnel much of the directorate's budget into three
"systemic" programs.

Mr. Williams hopes through these efforts to achieve unprecedented
cooperation among teacher educators, institutions, the education
bureaucrats, business leaders, parents, and politicians to reform
schooling in 26 states, the nation's poorest cities, and in rural
areas. Each of those areas, he argues, faces unique obstacles to
reform.

The three programs are unusual because they require the local school
officials and political leaders involved with the projects to sign
cooperative agreements with the science foundation spelling out
specific benchmarks for reform projects.

Failure to meet those benchmarks can quickly result in a loss of
funding under the program, as officials in Rhode Island found out
earlier this year. (See Education Week, 04/13/94.)

The stringent rules are designed to reverse what Mr. Williams
characterizes as decades of "tinkering at the margins" of reform.

"What absolutely terrified me in moving into this arena was the
record of the previous 25 years," he said. "On a very favorable day, I
would give the [existing system] a D-plus. And the country doesn't
have, in my judgment, multiple decades to solve the problem."

It is not surprising, then, that in guiding the directorate through
a fundamental change in philosophy, Mr. Williams has become a magnet
for both criticism and praise.

Large-Scale Reform

Critics have called him aloof, arrogant, directive--even
dictatorial--for his unyielding adherence to reform on such a wide
scale. They argue that the agency demands too much of local governments
for its relatively small financial contribution, which is limited under
the program to $15 million over five years.

They also say that the N.S.F. has been hesitant and contradictory in
describing its goals for systemic reform.

The N.S.F. is often "more of an obstacle to reform," argued David
Molina, the principal investigator for the systemic initiative in
Texas, which has been threatened with a funding cutoff.

But supporters such as Rep. Louis Stokes, D-Ohio, a longtime friend
of Mr. Williams's, maintain that he "is the right man, at the right
time, in the right position" to bring about lasting reform.
Representative Stokes is the chairman of the House Appropriations
subcommittee that oversees the directorate's budget.

Unfazed by the mixed reviews, Mr. Williams speaks of his mission
with the pace of a sprinter and the passion of a visionary.

"If you detect some intensity on my part, well, part of it grows out
of my personality," he conceded in an interview. "But part of it grows
out of the fact that I recognize the incredible challenge that is
associated with what we're trying to do."

Hard Lessons

Observers point out that it is almost impossible to assess Mr.
Williams's tenure in the education directorate without weighing the
value of the systemic-reform program. The identities of both, they say,
are closely intertwined.

Mr. Williams said that in challenging policymakers to "break ranks
with the old ways of doing business," he is in a sense applying stern
lessons his father taught him when he was growing up as an
African-American in segregated Sawyerville, Ala.

Expectations were set, he explained, and excuses for failure were
not accepted.

Mr. Williams credits those hard lessons for allowing him to reach
his current position as one of only a handful of black men in the
nation who not only hold advanced degrees in the sciences, but who also
wield enough authority within the federal government to shape education
policy.

He is quick to admit the symbolic value his race and background
bring to his task.

"When I think about what [students] should be asked to do, I'm not
inclined to defer to the fact that they're impoverished," he said.

Mr. Williams believes the educational system has failed to challenge
minority youths to succeed in the sciences. That, he said, has denied
them the knowledge and habits of mind vital to success in today's
technological world.

He said evidence gathered by following students in N.S.F. programs
proves that systemic reforms, if thoughtfully implemented, can disprove
some damaging myths about minority students' ability to learn.

"One, they can. Two, they will. But they will only do it under a
very demanding construct," Mr. Williams said.

Too often, administrators have accepted substandard performance in
exchange for political stability, he added.

"I'm not being unkind to these people, but they know, despite all of
these [reform] efforts, that the enterprise for which they have the
leadership role is getting worse, year after year," he said.

While the systemic program is only the first step in an evolving
effort, Mr. Williams said that in some states, such as Louisiana, it
has caused "nothing short of a revolution" in school reform.

There, Gov. Edwin Edwards and the state legislature have been
successful in reallocating scarce state dollars to support reform. An
aggressive advertising campaign has been mounted, and teacher training
programs have been revamped.

Although the program is aimed specifically at improving math and
science education, Mr. Williams argues that reform of those subjects
will, by definition, force comprehensive change across the
curriculum.

Expanding Role

Although systemic reform has been the directorate's main focus, Mr.
Williams has made his mark on science education in other ways.

Since he took the helm in 1990 after serving as the senior science
adviser to the former N.S.F. director, Erich Bloch, the directorate's
budget has soared, from less than $221 million in fiscal 1990 to $606
million this year.

And, Mr. Williams notes, roughly 40 percent of the directorate's 33
programs have been launched since his arrival.

Under his direction, the N.S.F. rattled the reform movement last
year by declining to bankroll an expansion of one of the nation's
premier science-reform efforts: the National Science Teachers
Association's Scope, Sequence, and Coordination of Secondary School
Science project.

The n.s.t.a. had asked for $39 million to expand its reform effort
from middle school to the high school level. (See Education Week,
06/02/93.)

Mr. Williams said the agency's peer-review process revealed the
application lacked any proof that the project would succeed.

In an interview, he noted quickly--in a nod to critics of the
decision--that the N.S.F. does not run "entitlement programs."

Bill G. Aldridge, the n.s.t.a.'s executive director, conceded that
the application was poorly prepared and later took a leave of absence
to oversee a more tightly focused version of the project that
emphasizes greater accountability. (See Education Week, 09/07/94.)

Web Only

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.